Olympics

As someone who has no interest what-so-ever in anything Olympic related I am thoroughly fed up with the BBC's coverage.  Even the news is full of reports from Rio. 

Also, the money the government and the lottery spends on these athletes could be much better spent on hospitals/doctors/dementia care etc etc.

Well, that certainly counts as grumpy!!

Sorry but I love the Olympics. It could save the NHS money as the kids today who watch it will do their upmost to find a sport they love and get fit. I understand your frustration at the BBC coverage of it but surely there are enough channels on the tele today for you to watch something else. Or you could read a good book!!!!!   

rose49f wrote:Sorry but I love the Olympics. It could save the NHS money as the kids today who watch it will do their upmost to find a sport they love and get fit. I understand your frustration at the BBC coverage of it but surely there are enough channels on the tele today for you to watch something else. Or you could read a good book!!!!!   

        

I find it compulsive viewing and with the Paralympics just round the corner ...

I rarely watch TV when away in the van....but the Cycling is so exciting. I'm watching now sitting on the edge of my seat. It's only two weeks every four years after all.

I am with the OP bristol,

 I have no objection to people who want to run and jump around or chase a ball about but I don't see why I should subsidize them in any way.

 The same goes for the Government and Councils subsidizing Opera and the arts. If opera costs £200 a seat to produce then that's what the people who want to watch it should pay. If there is not enough people willing to pay the money then tough. Opera's a bit like a trying to sell a new Morris Marina in a showroom full of Merc's at the same price.

I have really enjoyed the Oilypics, what I don't get though is celebrating losing... We don't celebrate when our esteemed football and cricket team come second

Shame about the Russian Paralympic squad ban for using  an illegal substance. Apparently it was WD40.

Well what a grumpy few on here, I cannot do sports now, but admire those that do and the effect required and the honour of representing our country, we should be proud of them especially the Paralympics. it is only every four years, what about all the football that is on through the year, and interrupting the programmes I like to watch.  

I don`t watch a lot of telly, just selective what I do watch, I like reading, crafting etc, if you don`t like it switch over plenty of other channels, or even better switch off and take up a sport.

Good analysis in today's Independent by Janet Street-Porter.

"It’s been estimated that each medal in Rio has cost £5.5m of public funding. There are some tough questions to be asked about whether financial priorities should be re-aligned to focus on the many, rather than the few."

"The discrepancy between the impressive achievements by Team GB and a lack of motivation in the population at large is increasing. The number of adults playing any sport has dropped since 2012. In the poorest areas like Yorkshire and Humber, 67,000 fewer people are involved in sport. In Doncaster the decline is over 13 per cent, whereas in well-heeled Oxford, it’s up 14 per cent."

Have a look at the article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rio-2016-team-gb-olympic-medals-55m-each-can-we-justify-brits-slump-sofa-a7198906.html

It made me think. The money spent on nurturing the elite isn't doing anything much for the health of the public.

Hadn`t better put what I think of that, would get chucked off the site.You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. meaning general public.

Who are the elite? not the sportsmen / women most have to pay their own way.

daisy mae wrote:Who are the elite? not the sportsmen / women most have to pay their own way.

Yes indeed.

I competed at World level twice and at European three times. I received not one penny, nor any assistance of any kind, even having to pay my own travel and accommodation expenses.

I came 9th in the world, which would have made me very wealthy if it was golf for example. But it wasn't, and I had to give up competing because it was costing too much money and family time.

Do I regret it - no, of course not.

Am I bitter - yes, I confess I am a bit when I see footballers and many others earning a fortune, just because their sport is telegenic (is that a word?) and popular among the masses.

Dave

YOU CAN'T JUST LEAVE IT THERE GROMIT! 

My guess is....?

I bet you are wrong Hog - but have a go.

As much beer as you can drink it you get it right.

Dave

Gromit wrote:

daisy mae wrote:Who are the elite? not the sportsmen / women most have to pay their own way.

Yes indeed.

I competed at World level twice and at European three times. I received not one penny, nor any assistance of any kind, even having to pay my own travel and accommodation expenses.

I came 9th in the world, which would have made me very wealthy if it was golf for example. But it wasn't, and I had to give up competing because it was costing too much money and family time.

Do I regret it - no, of course not.

Am I bitter - yes, I confess I am a bit when I see footballers and many others earning a fortune, just because their sport is telegenic (is that a word?) and popular among the masses.

Dave

Well done Dave I take my hat off to you, apart from the financial side of it the training effort and time involved must have been tremendous.  Footballers get far too much money in my opinion, sportsmanship seems to have flown out of the window as soon as big money became involved. When I was young and went to football matches with my Father, the footballers had another job as they didn`t get paid that much. now it has gone beyond the ridiculous.

What really rankled was when the French initially refused to go to the second World Championships I competed in . . . because they were not going to be given their usual €200 spending money! This on top of all expenses paid, preferential and private training facilities at no expense to themselves plus all travelling expenses, and expensive custom tuned equipment - again at no expense.

It cost them nothing to train or attend, but they threw a strop when their pocket money was stopped. Needless to say the authorities backed down and they got their spending money, but it did hurt at the time.

Dave

P.S. Any guesses Hog?

As much beer as I can drink, that isn't going to cost you much........let me sleep on it

I'll give you a clue.

The "equipment" I used was made in about 1840.

Dave

I'm with the OP on this too. OK, there are hundreds of channels available but I'm afraid most of them don't show stuff we want to watch, far too many so-called reality programmes, American cop shows and their totally rubbish humour, our totally rubbish humour. We could watch DVDs but we pay for TV, the least they could do is show something worth watching.

Yes, it's only every 4 years so why can't they put it on a lesser channel? 

And why are they still showing EastEnders but can't show other regular programmes?

Nora

Tiddly winks, fishing or bowls?

Not even close.

I'm off to bed now. Good night all - my Horlicks is ready!

Dave

Gromit wrote:I'll give you a clue.

The "equipment" I used was made in about 1840.

Dave

Muzzle Loading Shooting?

Archery?

Chess? Backgammon? Carriage/coach driving (as in horse-drawn)? Town crying?

Lets examine the evidence

Since I do not know whether you have the build of Geoff Capes or Willie Carson the starting point is not too good. The French team were paid in Euros so you must have competed after 2000 at which time you would have been in your 50's.

Expensive equipment is involved that can be tuned so we can rule out boxing, wrestling and contact sports and sports that involve inanimate objects like bowls, javelin etc and anything that doesn't involve the use of equipment. It has to be something that 1840's equipment can compete with more modern unless the competition is something relevant to the age.

I am not sure you have lumberjack related sports in the UK and Lady G's suggestion of cheese rolling -1840 the cheese would have rolled itself!

Crossbow or target reated is possible but like TrickyWoo I think I will go for some form of carriage driving although the horse itself would probably not date from 1840.

If I am wrong I undertake to leave the Country on Thursday..... If I am right I undertake to leave the Country on Thursday....

PLOUGHLIN wrote:

Gromit wrote:I'll give you a clue.
The "equipment" I used was made in about 1840.
Dave

Muzzle Loading Shooting?

Well done Peter.

Specifically pistol shooting, using my favourite circa 1840 duelling pistol.

I have enormous respect for "real" athletes who go to the Olympics (or any high level events) but I was never one of them. I didn't have the drive or dedication to give up my life for four years with only hope to keep me going.

To me, black powder target shooting was an absorbing and very enjoyable hobby, and I just happened to be good at it. I had to practice a lot of course, but much of it was possible in the back garden with an air pistol so it wasn't exactly life consuming. Some of the Olympic hopefuls get up every day of the year at 4.00am, summer and winter for outdoor training, or travel many miles to practice several times per week - they are the ones who deserve the respect. And they don't get any financial support from lottery or other sources until they have already dragged themselves nearly to the top at their own effort and expense.

It annoys me when TV presenters comment on how hard the winners have trained for the past four years and have now been rewarded with a medal - as if the losers were there just for the ride!! ALL of the competitors have trained just as hard, PLUS loads of others who didn't get selected at the last minute. They all deserve the same respect, particularly poor devils like Tom Daley who had to suffer so much media attention and expectation, which must have had an influence. Without all the "also rans" there wouldn't be any winners!!

They are a breed apart from we ordinary mortals.

Dave